8


which swept all over the country. I never really understood the

origin of it, but everyone seemed to feel that the curricula should

be changed. It never was very clear to me why these changes were

essential, but the changes were made, and I tried to go along

with them, because, personally, I never felt that the curriculum,

per se, was very important. The curriculum is sort of an arrangement

of things in the calendar, basically. The thing that is important

are the teachers and the students, and how they are able to get

along together. If the curriculum makes it easy for them to

benefit from each other's presence that's fine. If it makes

is difficult, then that's a disadvantage. But I have felt that a

great deal of time is. spent on developing a new curriculum, and

there are some good aspects to the changes that have been made,

but I think that the changes could have been made more efficiently.

I think that a great deal of time has been wasted by people

having to spend hours at committee meetings at which nothing very

productive happened. The discussions centered so much on the

mechanics of education, and very little on the substance. I think

that is wasteful of the talents of the people involved. I know

that, in our own department in the early days, we did spend a lot

of time together as a department, as a committee, discussing the

matter of teaching physiology to students, but the things we were

discussing were physiology. We were teaching each other so.

that we would all be adequate to teach physiology to the students,